ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2025
Tracheostomy in COVID-19 critically ill patients: a bibliometric and visual analysis.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Percutaneous versus surgical tracheostomy in mechanically ventilated ICU patients: a bibliometric review and visual analysis (1990-2024).Journal of thoracic disease · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-induced acute respiratory failure often necessitates prolonged intubation and invasive mechanical ventilation, with tracheostomy frequently performed in critically ill patients requiring extended mechanical ventilation. Bibliometrics, employing statistical methods to scrutinize research papers on specific topics mathematically, has not yet been applied to analyze publications concerning tracheostomy in COVID-19 critically ill patients. This study employs bibliometric techniques to scrutinize publications addressing this topic. Methods: The global literature on tracheostomy in COVID-19 from 2020 to 2023 was surveyed using the Scopus database. VOSviewer facilitated the bibliometric analysis of these articles. Results: The Scopus database yielded 1,268 records on tracheostomy in COVID-19 critically ill patients. Following independent screening by two reviewers, 359 papers were ultimately selected. Michael J. Brenner and Luis Angel emerged as the most prolific and cited authors, respectively. Numerous organizations contributed to related publications, with the Global Tracheostomy Collaborative leading in activity. The Amandela ENT Head and Neck Centre of Singapore and the National University Hospital of Singapore were the most cited organizations. Publications on tracheostomy in COVID-19 originated from 77 countries; the USA was the most active and cited. A total of 135 journals published the related papers, with the Conclusions: This bibliometric analysis provides a comprehensive perspective on the existing literature regarding tracheostomy in COVID-19.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.